Commission on Teacher Credentialing
1900 Capitol Avenue Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 324-8002
Fax (916) 324-8927
www.ctc.ca.gov
Professional Services Division
February 7, 2013
Dr. Jim Marshall
Associate Dean
California State University, Fresno
5005 N. Maple Avenue
Fresno, CA 93740-8025
Dear Dr. Marshall:
Congratulations! After completing a review of your Program Assessment resubmission for your
Early Childhood Specialist program, readers have made a preliminary finding that your program
appears to be preliminarily aligned with all program standards. Attached, you will find a copy of
the feedback form from this review with revised standard status shown in green. Please note, as
indicated on the form, that all Program Standard Findings are preliminary until the site visit team
reviews evidence at the site visit.
Within the next two months please submit a final electronic version of your document that
incorporates any changes and additions made during the program assessment process. Please
refer to PSA 10-12. Submit your document as an email attachment to
ProgramAssessment@ctc.ca.gov or on a flash drive, by mail, to our office as soon as possible.
Please note that we cannot accept email attachments larger than 10MB or zipped files.
As your program has been preliminarily determined to be in alignment with all standards, no
additional program response is required at this time. However, you may see comments on the
feedback form regarding information that needs to be reviewed on site by the site visit team.
There is no need to send that information to the Commission, but have it available at the site
visit.
Should you have questions about the information contained in this report, the Program
Assessment process, or how to submit additional information, please send an e-mail to
ProgramAssessment@ctc.ca.gov and a staff member will respond to you promptly.
Sincerely,
Cheryl Hickey
Administrator of Accreditation
cc:
Dr. Paul Beare, Dean
Dr. Katie Croy – CTC Consultant
Ms. Tonja Jarrell – CTC Consultant
Ensuring Educator Excellence
Commission on Teacher Credentialing
Program Assessment Feedback
Early Childhood Specialist Credential Program (1992)
Institution
California State University Fresno
Date of initial review
February 2012
Subsequent dates of review
February 2013
General Comments:
Early Childhood Specialist Credential Program Standards
*Status
Standard
Standard 1: Program Design, Rationale, and Coordination
Preliminarily
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 2: Institutional Attention to the Program
Preliminarily
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
More
Standard 3: Resources Allocated to the Program
Information Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Needed
In what way is the Fansler organization connected to CSUF and to the “Resources”
standard? Please provide more information about this organization.
Preliminarily Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Aligned
Standard 4: Qualifications of Faculty
Preliminarily
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 5: Faculty Evaluation and Development
Preliminarily Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 6: Program Evaluation and Development
Preliminarily
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 7: Admission of Candidates: Academic Qualification
Preliminarily Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Preliminarily Standard 8: Admission of Candidates: Prior Experience and Qualifications
Aligned
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Program Assessment for each approved educator preparation program is required as part of the Commission’s
accreditation activities. The Preliminary Report of Findings does not imply that any of the Commission’s Program
Standards are Met . The decision if each standard is met or not is the responsibility of the site visit team.
1
Early Childhood Specialist Credential Program Standards
*Status
Standard
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 9: Availability of Program Information
Preliminarily
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 10: Candidate Advisement and Placement
Preliminarily
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 11 : Candidate Assistance and Retention
Preliminarily Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
Aligned
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Standard 12: Determination of Candidate Competence
Questions, Comments, Additional Information Needed:
On pages 1 and 2 of the program handbook it says:
“Practitioners in these credential areas have identified the following skills and knowledge
statements as basic competencies essential for entry into the field. Institutions preparing
candidates for these credentials shall design their programs for such skills and knowledge
required for service in these credential areas.”
More
Information
Needed
“Programs shall provide a brief response on how each of the following professional
competencies is addressed in the coursework and field experiences.”
While the program has addressed the Standards of Program Quality and Effectiveness for
Teaching Specialist and Services Credential and has listed the CTC program
competencies by number in most syllabi, reviewers did not see specific responses to the CTC
Preliminarily
fieldwork and candidate competencies as requested by the handbook.
Aligned
A matrix has been provided (see attachment) that demonstrates the match between
competencies and field experiences (with an X) to where they are addressed in the course
work. We have found that there are places where the program does not address a particular
competency. While the handbook (also attached) specifically asks for a “brief response,” at
this time, please return a completed matrix indicating where the missing competencies will
be addressed. These unaddressed competencies should include a brief response about how
and in which course they will be addressed.
Evidence to be reviewed at the site visit:
Site team members should follow up on these missing competencies, asking to see syllabi
and assignments that address them.
Program Assessment for each approved educator preparation program is required as part of the Commission’s
accreditation activities. The Preliminary Report of Findings does not imply that any of the Commission’s Program
Standards are Met . The decision if each standard is met or not is the responsibility of the site visit team.
2